Wow, just wow.
I have personal feelings about the infield fly rule that Matthew Lillard explains in the video below.
Just a terrible rule, an archaic rule, an......well, you get the point. And just to be clear, here is the wording of the infield fly rule per the MLB Rule Book:
Rule 2.00 (Infield Fly) Comment: On the infield fly rule the umpire is to rule whether the ball could ordinarily have been handled by an infieldernot by some arbitrary limitation such as the grass, or the base lines. The umpire must rule also that a ball is an infield fly, even if handled by an outfielder, if, in the umpires judgment, the ball could have been as easily handled by an infielder. The infield fly is in no sense to be considered an appeal play. The umpires judgment must govern, and the decision should be made immediately.When an infield fly rule is called, runners may advance at their own risk. If on an infield fly rule, the infielder intentionally drops a fair ball, the ball remains in play despite the provisions of Rule 6.05 (L). The infield fly rule takes precedence.No matter how you slice this rule up (And rest assured, they will), the play has to be one that could be easily handled by an infielder. An outfielder can make the catch mind you, but an infielder has to be able to make the same play with ordinary effort.
That's quite the run. And it would have been a pretty spectacular catch had Kozmo made the play, but he didn't. Hell, even Matt Holliday didn't make the play (Of course, he may have just been worried about taking one off the junk).
The Braves finished the game under protest, but that wont make a bit of difference because the infield fly rule is a judgement call, and per the rule, is in no sense to be considered an appeal play. Time to move on Atlanta, Chipper's career closes out with more of silent fart than a big bang (not to mention a HUGE error), and the rest of the team has an entire fall and winter to think about how to get back to the dance next season. At least you guys have Kris Medlen.